So you've no facts or figures then, just as I thought.

Quite obviously you don't require any statistics to argue your bollax, we can all see that quite clearly.

What happened 95-97, you've lost three years off your last "statistics".

Oh, and '90 has been added now, so the previous Tory administration had us in recession from 1990 to 1997 - I can see now why the current incumbants seem to think that we've seen nothing yet.

You really, really ought to do a bit of research before making yourself look a complete twit.

Here is a list of recessions in the UK since 1900https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_recessions_in_the_United_Kingdomrl

As you can see the recession in the 90's lasted a total of 5 quarters in the years 1990-1992. That is 1 1/4 years not 6 years!

What that means is - if you look at that graph I posted is that the Tories ran a deficit when we were not in recession for about 4 1/2 years. So you do not have a point at all as they ran large deficits on an economic upside as well.

Then again I suppose you could be trying to excuse the Tory deficit of the 90's as spending their way out of recession (we were no longer in!) but that can't be right or you would be calling for the same thing now wouldn't you instead of harping on about paying off the "credit card bill"?

What is also interesting about the list of recessions table is the "causes" column. Both the 1990-1992 recessions and the 2008-2009 recessions were caused by external factors. US savings and loan collapse in 1990-1992 and the financial crisis in 2008. In both cases the recessions lasted 1 1/4 years.

The causes of the latest recession are Fiscal retrenchment and the Euro crisis which means it is at least partly "Made in Britain" by the current government trying to pay off the "credit card bill" as you simplistically call it too quickly. It is also the first double dip recession since 1975.

So it seems to me in your attempt to excuse what went on in the 1990's you are arguing against current government policy. You seem a tad confused.

I am convinced your "facts" are wrong.

Quit while you still have some dignity left.

If you add the figures up for the years in question that is the total. So why are you convinced they are wrong?

Once again, the wall of text from the Lefties.

Is it any wonder people can't be bothered debating on here?

You're not debating, you are putting over a point of view and when it gets challenged you are sticking your fingers in your ears.

How ironic..........

Your first post in response to me was



Fantastic debating skills. Not only do you offer no counter to the argument, you then bizarely bring up a completely seperate issue, BOP.

There was nothing to argue against FFS, to make a matter of opinion with nothing to back it up is not debating, when challenged you make more statements, shift dates and still produce nothing to back up your statements, again not debating.

If you think the current situation and the banking collapse are separate issues then we have nothing to debate, you simply don't have the first clue what you are talking about.

You have not offered a single counter argument to my responses to your posts other than posting the nonsense that we were in recession from 1991-1997. Making stuff up doesn't count as debating. HTH.

Look at your figures again they are ludicrous.

You are suggesting that the "deficit" was running at c. 20 times annual GDP for 6 years running. Who on Earth would have lent us the money if that were the case? What would the current debt be as a percentage of GDP!!??

I'll make it simple for you - they are out by a factor of c. 1,000! Which goes to show you ain't actually got the faintest idea of what you are talking about, you have just done websearches, picked out some figures which you wholly misinterpreted because you simply don't understand them.

Oh dear


This is the danger with quoting statistics without standing back and interpeting them.

They are not "my" figures and you clearly have not read the post properly.

I saidtotaled £201029bn. The Tories ran a deficit for the last 6 years of their last government up to 1997 totaling £222788bn. "

That is this was the total deficit for 6 years not that they ran these deficits every year for 6 years which is clearly how you must have read it

So to spell it out for you:

Labour deficit:

2002 - 19046
2003 - 35050
2004 - 37840
2005 - 42399
2006 - 31801
2007 - 34893

Add that up and you get £201029bn

Tory deficit:

1991 - 17976
1992 - 40155
1993 - 50869
1994 - 45945
1995 - 38603
1996 - 29240

Add that up and you get £222788bn

Both totals represent the combined deficit both governments racked up over a SIX YEAR period when in office.

Now what is ludicrous about any of this?